SANDWELL HOMES STIR "ACCURACY" ROW

24-11-2006

Black Country housing provider Sandwell Homes has hit back at The Stirrer after being accused of a "monumental blunder” that set rival families at war. They claim our article is “inaccurate”, “misleading” and “poorly researched”. You can make up your own mind.

We reported earlier this month how neighbours in a West Bromwich street had been caught in a row over shared access to the rear of their terraced houses (Read the full story here).

On one side of the dispute, former council tenant Carlene Clarke had bought her end of terrace property, in the belief that a passageway traditionally used to gain access to the back of the house next door, was to be sealed off following problems with anti-social behaviour.

Letters written to Mrs Clarke by Sandwell Homes and seen by the Stirrer confirmed that this joint route was being permanently shut.

Enter new neighbours Pat and Andy Hallard who say they couldn't understand why the passageway was closed; everyone else in the street has shared access, so why shouldn't they too?

This was particularly critical for the Hallards when they were threatened with eviction because of the unkempt state of their garden. They argued that when they were trying to clean it up, because they didn't have joint access, they were being forced to traipse mud, leaves and branches through their house.

After lobbying the local MP Tom Watson, they were told categorically by their landlord Sandwell Homes that the passageway would be re-opened on 25 August 2005 - again, The Stirrer has seen the letter.

As you can imagine, with families next door to each other having been given contradictory information, tensions grew. Both believed that they were in the right. Carlene Clark has spoken movingly to me about the stress she and her family were under after being ostracised by other neighbours in the street. The Hallards, too, told me of their anger and confusion.

These are facts that we stand by, and which we believe justify the comments in our earlier report. Sandwell Homes reckon we've got it wrong, and we are happy to print their statement in full. This is what we received from their PR Kelly Ruston.

Peter John, Sandwell Homes' operations director has responded to the inaccurate and misleading article in 'The Stirrers' website about the rear access to a council house in Richard Street West, West Bromwich.

He confirmed that the house in question is in the middle of a terrace and did use to have rear access, which created serious safety and security problems for the family next door. The access route was closed off in October 2004.

Peter John said: " Mr and Mrs Hallard were offered the tenancy of the house when it became vacant, and their tenancy began in January 2005 - 3 months after the access way was closed. They saw the house before accepting it, and were well aware that there was no rear access."

"Following further enquiries from Tom Watson MP, a housing officer wrongly said that the access way would be opened but there is no intention of re-establishing a rear access to the property and Mr and Mrs Hallard know this."

He added: "Earlier this year we had complaints about rats in Mr and Mrs Hallard's back garden and when we checked it out it was obvious they were living in domestic refuse, timber and other stuff, which Mr and Mrs Hallard had taken through their house and dumped there.

"We asked Mr and Mrs Hallard to clear the tip they had created and said we'd take legal action if they didn't clear the mess up.

"I'm pleased to say that Mr and Mrs Hallard have now taken all the rubbish away and following visits from the Council's Environmental health team, the rats have also gone.

"There has been no 'monumental blunder', and neighbours are not 'at each others throats' as stated in The Stirrers poorly researched article. Nor will any tax payers (or more accurately, rent payers) money be spent on opening up this access-way.

"The situation hasn't changed since before Mr and Mrs Hallard moved into the house and it isn't going to change now."

Our reading of this shows that Sandwell Homes acknowledge that they made a mistake in telling the Hallards that the rear entry to their house would be re-opened. As this hasn't happened, it may now leave them vulnerable to a costly legal challenge. And if the access is opened, they will be sued by Carlene Clarke.

We also know that relations between the neighbours were, to put it politely, extremely strained - Stirrer editor Adrian Goldberg personally visited both the Hallards and the Clarkes and spoke to members of both families.

There is nothing in Sandwell Homes response that in our view justifies their claim that our piece was in any way “poorly researched” - although readers are of course free to disagree.

In the meantime this dispute has not gone away. Councillor Elaine Costigan from the nearby Wednesbury North constituency is demanding more information from Sandwell Council about this unfortunate saga. We'll keep you updated.

Did The Stirrer get it wrong? Tell us on the messageboard.